Mencius said, “The wise kings of antiquity loved goodness so much that they forgot their own power and status. Why would the wise scholars of antiquity be any different? They took joy in their own moral principles so much that they forgot the power and status of others.
Therefore, if kings and nobles do not show respect and exhaust all proper etiquette, they cannot frequently meet with these scholars. If they cannot even meet with them frequently, how much less could they expect to make them their subjects?”
Note
This passage from the Jin Xin I chapter of the Mencius is a brilliant discourse on the “ruler-minister relationship” and the “moral backbone of the scholars.” Drawing on the historical context of the Warring States period and traditional commentaries, we can understand its underlying thought through the following dimensions:
- The Equality of Spirit and Power: “Loving Goodness and Forgetting Status” vs. “Rejoicing in the Way and Forgetting Status”
Mencius depicts an ideal two-way interaction here: the ruler sets aside their lofty power and status because they “love goodness” (pursuing truth and good governance); similarly, the wise scholar ignores the intimidation of the nobles because they “rejoice in the Way” (adhering to morality and truth). This “forgetting of status” is essentially the transcendence of spiritual faith over secular power. Mencius believed that in the face of truth and morality, worldly titles and power are insignificant, establishing the absolute spiritual independence and equality of intellectuals. - The Backbone of the Intellectuals: “Without Respect and Exhaustive Etiquette, One Cannot Meet Frequently”
During the Warring States period, many traveling scholars flattered the powerful and begged for patronage, lacking any dignity. However, Mencius established a rule for true “wise scholars” here: if principles differ, one should not associate. If a ruler wishes to seek advice, they must demonstrate utmost sincerity and etiquette. If their attitude is arrogant and their manners inadequate, the scholar will refuse to meet them. This “refusal to meet” is not pretentiousness, but a defense of the “Way,” showcasing the unyielding backbone of Confucian scholars who “cannot be corrupted by wealth, shaken by power, or bent by force.” - Redefining the Ruler-Minister Contract: From “Personal Dependence” to “Association Based on the Way”
Mencius finally asks, “If they cannot even meet with them frequently, how much less could they expect to make them their subjects?” This sentence is a powerful counterattack against the tendency toward autocratic rule at the time. In Mencius’ view, the ruler-minister relationship is by no means absolute personal dependence, but a bilateral contract based on the “Way.” A ruler can only win the assistance of talented scholars by treating them with the respect due to a teacher and seeking them with sincerity. If a ruler merely treats scholars as servants to be summoned at will, the scholars will undoubtedly leave. This greatly elevated the political status and personal dignity of the scholar-officials.
孟子曰：“古之贤王好善而忘势，古之贤士何独不然？乐其道而忘人之势。故王公不致敬尽礼，则不得亟见之。见且由不得亟，而况得而臣之乎？”
Leave a Reply